Figverse Wiki talk:Manual of Style
Point of view and tense I've noticed that there's a bit of a disagreement over what tense articles should be in, and, after realizing that there's no mention of tense in the Manual of Style, decided that the easiest way to settle things would be to open a discussion on the matter. While we're at it, I thought it would be best to tackle a relevant issue, Point of View. Tense is relatively obvious: should we describe everything on this wiki as if it no longer exists or has already happened, or ought we to describe everything as if it still exists and/or is happening. Or maybe we ought to describe everything as though it will happen or will exist. Perhaps a combination of them all, or perhaps something entirely different! Point of view is a little more complex, but it basically boils down to this: should articles be written from the point of view of someone in-universe (i.e. we write from the prospective of someone who exists in the same universe as Pseudolonewolf's games take place in, and treat said games as historic events), or someone out-of-universe (i.e. we write from the perspective of someone who does not exist in the same universe as Pseudolonewolf's games take place in)? At the moment, all of our articles are written from an out-of-universe point of view, but I don't think we should necessarily take into account our current state; perhaps, after some discussion, we'll come to the conclusion that an in-universe POV is better, or perhaps we won't. Point of view would affect a few things, as follows: * Choosing an in-universe POV would pretty much decide our tense for us: we would have to write articles from a past tense, since games would be treated as historical events. ** An in-universe POV paired with a future tense would be confusing to readers, so we shouldn't go that route. ** An in-universe POV with a present tense would technically be possible, considering as how no two games/series (viewed as events) take place in the same place, it leads to some interesting conclusions. *** If everything is written in present tense, then the logical conclusion is that they all take place at the same time (that time, by the way, is now). *** If all events recorded on Fig Hunter Wiki take place at the same time, then how do we know that they're happening, and how are we able to record them? **** For that matter, we'd have to write about all three of the MARDEK games in present-tense! Events happening at distinctly different times, simultaneously?! *** If we can see and record multiple events across great stretches of space simultaneously, then we're omniscient. The only omniscient... uh... beings to exist in the Fig Hunter Universe are deities. So we're saying that we're a deity. *** Any user who attempts to figure out this POV and tense thing will be thoroughly confused at this point. ** The cleanest, most reliable and sensible way to write things from an in-universe POV is from an unspecified point in time in the future, using a past tense. * If we write from an in-universe POV, then certain articles would need to be written from an out-of-universe POV. ** If certain articles are written from a different POV than the norm, then we would have to alert users (presumably via a template at the top of the article) about the sudden change in POV. * If we write from an out-of-universe POV, then we should use whichever tense makes the most sense in relation to our universe. ** For instance, MARDEK 3 has already been released, so we ought to write articles pertaining to the events of that game in a past tense. ** The MARDEK 4 has not been released yet, so we ought to write articles pertaining to the events of that game in a future tense. ** Pseudolonewolf is currently working (or not working, as he has pointed out several times now) on Miasmon 1. In this instance, we ought to write in a present tense. *** A general rule of thumb would be that in-game content would never be written in a present tense, since either the game has already come out, or it will come out in the future. "The game is coming out right now" only lasts for a few seconds, really, after which the game is out, and has been out for a period of time (a short one, yes, but still a period of time). * Branching dialogue is an interesting case. ** From an in-universe perspective, branching dialogue would be relatively easy to write about if, and only if, one branch or another is considered canon. *** How would we write branching dialogue that isn't important enough to have a canonically-correct route, such as Manfred's dialogue tree in MARDEK 2, or branching dialogue that has no canonical route. **** Writing such dialogue from an in-universe POV would be a little awkward. ***** Mardek considered killing Gope, but then decided against it. ***** Mardek is considering killing Gope, but now he's decided against it. ***** Mardek will consider killing Gope, but will ultimately decide against it. **** The easiest route for branching dialogue would be to present it from an out-of-universe POV. ***** The player is presented with the option to kill Gope, and the option to spare him. ****** If articles are written from an in-universe POV, and such branching dialogue sections are written from an out-of-universe POV, then we would need both a template to inform users that the entire article is written from an out-of-universe POV, and a template to inform users that a section of an article is written from an out-of-universe POV. Basically like the three spoiler templates, Template:Spoiler, Template:SStart, and Template:SEnd, only for information written in an out-of-universe POV. That's about everything I can think of on the matter. What say you guys? DarthKitty (talk) 17:01, September 16, 2012 (UTC) :Uhm, what are the advantages of an in-universe PoV compared to an out-of-universe one? :About the tense thing... For an out-of-universe PoV, the events in the games are not relative to 'now' as they exist in a different universe. And works of fiction are supposed to 'come alive' when read (or something like that) so I think they should use the present tense, unless if they're upcoming, in that case they should use the future tense. - Chimto (talk) 10:24, September 19, 2012 (UTC) ::I don't really think an in-universe POV has much of an advantage, but I've seen it done on two pretty large wikis (Memory Alpha and Memory Beta). I figured it would be best to put as many options on the table as I could think of, regardless of whether I agree or disagree with them. ::Now that I think about it, there are a few advantages of an in-universe POV: * By choosing an in-universe POV, we also select our tense in one fell swoop. * An in-universe POV would make it slightly easier to standardize certain templates, such as user-content that isn't localized to a userpage or subpage thereof. * An in-universe POV would make it easier to distinguish between what is fictional content, and what exists in the real world. * Many already-written articles seem to be in an in-universe POV, such as Belfan, or Jacques. ::To the best of my knowledge, there's no rule that fiction ought to be written in a present tense; if that is a rule, it's oft ignored. Here's the wikipedia section you're presumably referencing (with links removed): The advice about factual articles also applies to articles on fiction subjects. Further considerations apply when writing about fictional topics because they are inherently not real. It is important to keep these articles verifiable and encyclopedic. If you add fictional information, clearly distinguish fact and fiction. As with normal articles, establish context so that a reader unfamiliar with the subject can get an idea about the article's meaning without having to check several links. Instead of writing : "Trillian is Arthur Dent's girlfriend. She was taken away from Earth by Zaphod when he met her at a party. She meets Dent while travelling with Zaphod." write : "Trillian is a fictional character from Douglas Adams's radio, book and now film series The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. In the first book, Trillian is introduced to the main character Arthur Dent on a spaceship. In her backstory, she was taken away from Earth when the space alien Zaphod Beeblebrox met her at a party." And so forth. Works of fiction are generally considered to "come alive" when read. They exist in a kind of perpetual present tense, regardless of when the fictional action is supposed to take place relative to "now." Thus, generally you should write about fiction using the present tense, not the past tense. : "Homer presents, Achilles rages, Andromache laments, Priam pleads." : "Darth Vader is a fictional character from Star Wars." : "Holden Caulfield has a certain disdain for what he sees as 'phony'." : "Heathcliff, who is taken in by the wealthy Earnshaw family as a child, falls in love with their daughter, Catherine." : Friends is an American sitcom that was aired on NBC. Conversely, discussion of history is usually written in the past tense and thus 'fictional history' may be presented in that way as well. : "Chroniclers claimed that Thalestris, queen of the Amazons, seduced Alexander the Great." Articles about fictional topics should not read like book reports; instead, they should explain the topic's significance to the work. After reading the article, the reader should be able to understand why a character, place, or event was included in the fictional work. It is generally discouraged to add fictional information from sources that cannot be verified or are limited to a very small number of readers, such as fan fiction and online role-playing games. In the latter case, if you absolutely have to write about the subject, please be especially careful to cite your sources. If the subject, say a character in a television show, is too limited to be given a full article, then integrate information about that character into a larger article. It is better to write a larger article about the television show or a fictional universe itself than to create all sorts of stubs about its characters that nobody can find. (Found here.) :: Note the use of past-tense writing after having defined the subject in question. The concept of Trillian hasn't changed, so we use the word "is." Ignore this. I missed half of the quote accidentally, and didn't notice when I was looking at it again for support. ::Like I said, I'm just trying to present as much information on this matter as I can, so that we as a community (a very small one at the moment) can come to a reasonable consensus. ::DarthKitty (talk) 03:12, September 20, 2012 (UTC)